memory_betafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:New Paris
I tried to rename this page 'New Paris' to fit its name in FASA and other sources, but New Paris is already a redirect to Turkana IV, so I wasn't able to. See Talk:Turkana IV for how "New Paris" isn't a common or canonical name for that world. -- BadCatMan 06:01, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :So I'm not 100% sure of the situation - this article describes Omega Aurigae II (the planet) but is named "... colonies" (as if it was about the settlements)... shouldn't the planet have its own article, and the settlements be a separate topic? (Kind of like the difference between "United States of America" and "North America"?) -- Captain MKB 07:47, August 7, 2011 (UTC) ::That's why I tried to rename the page. ::Several sources make it clear that the planet is named "New Paris": The Federation has a planet entry for New Paris, Articles of the Federation mentions it in a list of planets, and the novelization of The Galileo Seven says "on New Paris" along with "in/to the New Paris colonies" (I don't know about the episode itself, but Memory Alpha only used "New Paris colonies".) It's clear that the "New Paris colonies" refers to the colonies on New Paris, either unnamed or speaking generally. ::Consider: we wouldn't make a separate page for Cestus III colonies when Cestus III does the job just fine, would we? ::I tried to rename it, but couldn't, so I rearranged the the intro line to make it clear, leaving "New Paris colonies" bolded given the potentially more canonical albeit vague reference. ::So, we have two planets named "New Paris": Omega Aurigae II and Turkana IV. I say this one has more right to the name, as its closer to canon and more commonly used, but the "New Paris" disambig works well. Would renaming this planet to, say, "New Paris (Omega Aurigae)" be more appropriate? And the other to New Paris (Turkana)? -- BadCatMan 08:24, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :Actually I rather think we should have an article about the settlement on Cestus III separate from the article about the planet -- they are two different things, after all. :Since both planets have catalog names available, and both have been referred to as "New Paris", i'd think that the best way to establish their identities would be to relocate them to their catalog names as their article names, and redirect a New Paris disambiguant to each. -- Captain MKB 08:28, August 7, 2011 (UTC) ::You're joking, right? I do hope so. It would be rather pointless, a proliferation of pages and duplication of information with no benefit, given that everything one could want to know about Cestus III the planet and Cestus III the Federation member state are both there together, being the same thing. There's not enough text to warrant a split. :: I assumed the preference here was for given names, i.e. New Paris, over titles. This is no different from any other disambiguation case, which are always handled in the same way: Given Name (whatever is needed to say its different). -- BadCatMan 08:44, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :::I'm not joking - we do have separate articles for United Earth and Earth because the people, settlements and government are all separate examples of subtopics. The United States of America is in North America but is a separate entity from the continent. The Nazi government once had control of Germany but the people of Germany would remind you that it wasn't Germany itself, and the place is separate from the state that exists there. -- Captain MKB 09:09, August 7, 2011 (UTC) ::::But we have proper names for those. We don't have, say, the United Colonies of Cestus III, or to get back on topic, the New Paris Republic, or whatever. If we did, then yes, information pertaining to them should go under their separate articles. Just like some of cities and settlements of Cestus III. But all general Cestus III information belongs on the main Cestus III page. ::::"New Paris colonies" is definitely lower case and not a proper name for any of them. "New Paris Colony" ( ) is capitalized and maybe a proper name for one of them (all we know about them is that they coffeehouses and here on New Paris). So is "Cleanth", a city or settlement or something home to a printing works. We don't have a name for the 18thC French Republic-styled government, nor a name for the nation-state. This information belongs on the main page. This page is just fine the way it is. All it needs is a new name. -- BadCatMan 09:27, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :I'm concerned that you renamed this without a resolution to our discussion here. Anyway, Omega Aurigae II has never been used anywhere, while New Paris is the accepted canon name, so I took the liberty of renaming it to the current form. I hope this satisfies everyone. -- BadCatMan 12:51, August 7, 2011 (UTC) ::I don't think that we've reached a resolution because it has now been changed to -not- use a simpler name, which is unfortunate, and not something i would agree with. The simplest possible names for the two planets are Omega Aurigae II and Turkana IV - all the other names suggested involve cumbersome disambiguants and are difficult to write links to. These two names are in fact the simplest possible way to structure this, and they are valid names for these topics. -- Captain MKB 14:15, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :::'Omega Aurigae II' has never been used in any source whatsoever, only created because it is the second planet in its system. That is not at all a proper name. "New Paris" is its proper name. It's also the canon name. I checked the episode itself now and it most definitely states "on New Paris". A transcript here will show the context: http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/14.htm - I confirm that the relevant lines are accurate. :::This is exactly the format of any and every disambiguation on this wiki: Proper Noun (relevant difference). In this case, that relevant different is the star system that these planets are in. And yes, we should rename "Turkana IV" to "New Paris (Turkana)" as well. That's how the system works. -- BadCatMan 15:25, August 7, 2011 (UTC) :Renaming the Turkana article would be the height of idiocy - in the episode the planet was named Turkana IV. Even if the colony on the planet was named "New Paris", the valid catalog name of the planet itself is Turkana IV. We aren't renaming Earth to be City of Paris (on Sol III) because you want to reenvision how planets are named based on significant places on the planets. :The canonical use of "New Paris" as the name of the world gives it precedence and can finalize the discussion, so thank you for checking the transcript. But I have to say that some of your other points about how planets are named don't make any sense. The second planet of a system can be called Omega Aurigae II and that name is completely sensible and valid and appropriate and proper. It is less preferable because it hasn't been extensively used, but claiming that the name is invalid is not at all true. It is the way catalogued planets are named, even if the source hasn't collected the system and the ordinal into one phrasing, it still follows that the phrasing is valid... -- Captain MKB 17:01, August 7, 2011 (UTC) ::Picard, his face in his palm, as the Tamarians might say. I have made no such claims, so please don't ascribe them to me. I really can't make these things any clearer, so please do me the courtesy of reading all that I say, just as I've been reading your words closely, several times to be sure I've gotten your peculiar statements. ::As I've been saying all along, Omega Aurigae II might be technically correct but has never actually been used, while New Paris has been used frequently and canonically - hence why I argued in favour of New Paris being the primary name. And the current name of this article, "New Paris", was my very first choice, so thank you very much. I'm really quite happy and relieved that we've settled this. ::As I've also said here, and on Talk:Turkana IV and so on, the explicitly names Tasha Yar's home planet as "New Paris". I quote: first line, first page, Chapter 1: "The planet was called New Paris, for the emigrants from Earth who sought refuge in space after the Post-Atomic Horror meant their new world to be a planet of light." That is the source of the initial confusion I was trying to clear up: two planets, both named "New Paris". ::In Turkana IV's case, it is canonically "Turkana IV", not New Paris. Maybe the New Paris name fell out of fashion when the place fell apart, who knows. "New Paris (Omega Aurigae)" and "New Paris (Turkana)" were intended to clear up your confusion, but I am entirely satisfied with the current, canon-agreeing arrangement. -- BadCatMan 02:29, August 8, 2011 (UTC)